Voices in the city Urban renewal projects in Istanbul: A locus of contestations and demonstrations Maaike Wentink Supervisor: Dr. J. Jansen Master thesis: Cultural Anthropology & Development Sociology Leiden University, June 2014 Cover picture: Documentary screenshot Ekumenopolis 2012 Contents Preface 2 Chapter 1 – The case of Turkey 1.1 Introduction 4 1.2 Constructing history and building a future 6 1.3 Methodology 10 1.4 Theoretical background 17 Chapter 2 – The case of Taksim 2.1 Introduction 22 2.2 Gezi Park: The home of the real ҫapulcu 24 2.3 Taksim Square area: A space of legacies and demonstrations 29 2.4 More than meets the eye 33 Chapter 3 – The case of Tophane 3.1 Introduction 35 3.2 Gentrification in Tophane 37 3.3 The silence of Tophane 40 3.4 Same symbols different meaning 44 Chapter 4 – Localising neoliberalism in Istanbul 4.1 Introduction 46 4.2 The problem of social housing 48 4.3 A global city, a local meaning 51 4.4 A city we have lost 54 Chapter 5 – Conclusion: Small places, large issues 5.1 Introduction 58 5.2 Concluding Taksim & Tophane: A sense of belonging 61 Literature list 67 1 Preface In Istanbul, the impact of globalisation and neoliberalism can be seen in a dramatic ways. While the government enables gigantic and often controversial construction projects such as, shopping malls and the so-called social mass housing projects, it seems there is a complete disappearance of poor neighbourhoods. Istanbul truly appears to be the city without limits, experiencing an unstoppable growth, and a rapidly changing skyline. As we will see in this thesis, neoliberalism can be seen as a contested phenomenon that influences society at multiple levels. On the one hand neoliberalism follows the principle of reducing state interference in the market, but does not necessarily lead to a reduction of state control over society. In this thesis I provide critical reflections on urban renewal projects in Istanbul, as government and municipal bodies are trying to upgrade the present-day city to a modern world city. I focus on two case studies, the public urban space of the Taksim area and the neighbourhood of Tophane, and I analyse them in the context of the processes of globalisation and neoliberalism. I emphasize the dynamism of urban change by showing how on the one hand top- down political agendas are pushed by global forces, and on the other hand, civic actors defend spaces in the city to which they feel attached to. By highlighting some significant historic events I explain why certain places or symbols in the urban environment are important for different social groups, and how the desire to protect these spaces and symbols led to the Gezi protests during the summer of 2013. Although many social groups were represented during the Gezi protests, not every social group sees urban renewal as a threat because it can also provides new ways of earning income. In addition, several projects are designed to stimulate tourism which creates new jobs in the tourism industry while local shop keepers can sell their product to tourists. Nevertheless, some social groups feel alienated from the place they were “born and raised” as urban renewal changes the face of the city, and other groups face eviction as neighbourhoods undergo gentrification. Therefore, many citizens are demanding influence in the decision making processes concerning urban change in order to protect what is important for them in the urban environment using narratives like citizenship and democracy. I conclude this thesis by stating that it is not the government alone that is responsible for the socially painful situation the city is currently in since urban policies are impacted by global forces. Nevertheless, citizens are calling for recognition by the 2 government that they belong to the city and need a place to live, as they simultaneously demand from the government the right to protect spaces in the city they feel attached to. Throughout this thesis I will show that urban space is not the space for conflict, but an object of struggle itself. 3 Chapter 1 – The case of Istanbul 1.1 Introduction Istanbul, the biggest city in Turkey is experiencing some of the fastest changes since the beginning of its existence. The urban environment is being expanded with new structures, forcing the natural environment to step aside for (amongst other things), the many shopping malls, a third bridge over the Bosporus, a third airport and a Olympic stadium built for the Olympic games of 2020.1 The increase in the number of urban renewal projects are stimulated by policies of the ruling AK Party (Justice and Development Party) as these policies attract foreign investors and money making construction projects through a neoliberal economy.2 During these urban renewal projects symbols from different pasts are being removed or changed as an expression of political agendas and results of global processes having a deep impact on different social groups.3 During the summer of 2013, the public resistance started in response to urban development projects undertaken by Istanbul’s municipality and became world news. The resistance started peaceful against the destruction of a historically public park and urban commons, and turned into a resistance that was organized against urbanism that puts the interests of capital over the interests of the citizens of Istanbul (Kuymulu 2013: 275). As Kuymulu states: “Destroying Gezi Park for a shopping mall was packaged as part of a larger project of ‘urban transformation’ – AKP’s euphemism for gentrification – which aims to radically transform one of the most iconic urban centres in Turkey: Taksim 1 In September 2013, the Olympic committee announced that the Olympic games of 2020 were not appointed to Turkey. 2 Although many authors (Aksoy 2012; Catterall 2013; Kuyucu & Ünsal 2010) write about urban transformation in Istanbul, I speak in this thesis of urban renewal. The reason why I choose for urban renewal over urban transformation is that the word transformation implies that something is changed from the original while preserving some of its original state. In Istanbul however, most of the urban environment is being changed without the preservation of some of the original. Therefore I speak of urban renewal, which implies a replacement of a former object and seems more suitable to describe urban processes in Istanbul. 3 There are some anthropologists (see Barnard & Spencer 2002: 510-511) who use the term social structure or social organisation to refer to social groups such as nations, tribes, clans or to define the relation between individual people or the relation with one another (Barnard & Spencer 2002; Radcliffe- Brown 1940). I find it more useful to speak of (different) social groups which are in this thesis defined as such, based on their collective identities, backgrounds, place in the city or feelings concerning a specific topic (etc.). By speaking of social groups instead of social structures or social organisations I would like to emphasize feeling of collectiveness, defining these social groups and producing these social groups. 4 Square” (2013: 275). Or as Göle states about the Gezi protests: “Defending a few trees in Gezi Park is not merely a pretext for political contestation. The plan to destroy this public park in order to construct a shopping mall has aroused a new critical consciousness. The Gezi Occupation Movement, reflects resistance to the extreme urban development of the past ten years” (2013: 8). In this thesis I will explain why Taksim Square is described as iconic and how a critical consciousness produced narratives like citizenship and democracy that are used by citizens to claim certain parts of the city. Due to the AK Party’s agenda of stimulating construction projects through neoliberal policies, it is tempting to see urban change in Turkey as a political or economic act alone but of course other motivations for urban change are also involved. Many projects are undertaken out of an economic perspective to stimulate tourism or are an expression of modern living standards, while the city is also developed in order to endure earthquakes. Nevertheless, more than often within urban renewal projects political statements are being made. For example, the third bridge over the Bosporus that is currently under construction is said to be presented by the AK Party government as necessary for economic growth. However, the name of the third bridge, Yavuz Sultan Selim is contested for the Alevis community living in Turkey because of the Alevis massacre that happened in 1514 under this sultan’s reign. This leads to the consequence that many Alevis prefer not to use this bridge. Therefore the third bridge may be built from an economic point of view, the project has an underground dimension that is considered highly sensitive for specific social groups because of the name it is given. The case of the third bridge is an illustration of how symbolism in urban renewal projects is of significance for different social groups, even on the subtle level of the name of a project and influences how different social groups experience or are even excluded from specific urban spaces. Istanbul’s contested story of urban renewal is not unique in the world. Hence, cities and their urban spaces have always been the domain of politics and arenas for public discourse and expressions of discontent (Low 2000: 204). For example, when rulers use public urban space to document their achievements they contribute to the face of a city through symbols that represent ideas about (national) identity that make cities into a public domain (ibid.). On its way to become a modern world city Istanbul faces a mixture of difficulties concerning processes of globalisation and neoliberalism negotiating multiple identities like European, Asian, secular, Islamic and liberal, preferring certain 5 histories over others, all of which manifested themselves in the Gezi movements of 2013.4 This makes Istanbul an ideal site to study contested politics and symbolism in urban renewal projects and the significance of the public urban environment for different social groups.